Accused, Convicted, Executed- Ledell Lee. Guilty?

[aegsm76]

The pro-choice crowd has become somewhat bolder these days, with some even claiming that "after-birth" abortions should be permitted.

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

The rush to execute this man seems politically driven instead of justice driven.

I hope he is really guilty.

http://www.thv11.com/news/local/lede...ater/432531346

I hope he was guilty as well. It is tragic that DNA evidence was not allowed. It should have been IMO - especially when the death penalty hangs in the balance. I support the death penalty but measures must be taken to ensure the guilty are punished.

[Aquila]

This is sad.

What is believed to be the percentage of people executed who, after the fact, might have been wrongfully prosecuted? I heard it was around 11%.

That's too many in my opinion. That's why I'm not big on the death penalty without DNA evidence or incontrovertible evidence.

[Jito463]

Originally Posted by aegsm76

according to wikipedia
link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ledell_Lee
snippet
After being charged with the murder of Reese, he became a suspect in other crimes. Lee was convicted for the rape of two Jacksonville women and was accused of the murder and rape of 22-year-old Christine Lewis.[3] He was put on trail in the rape and murder of Christine Lewis, a 22-year-old mother, and the case ended in a hung jury.[4] In November 1989, Lewis was abducted from her home where she was later raped, strangled, and eventually killed. Her body was later found at an abandoned home inside a closet. That trial ended in a hung jury. When Lee received the death sentence for Reese’s murder, prosecutors decided not to pursue retrying him for the alleged murder of Lewis

snippet
Several of Reese's neighbors saw Lee near the house and identified him to police. Lee is alleged to have struck Debra Reese 36 times with a tire iron. He was arrested less than an hour later, allegedly after spending $300 stolen from Reese.

You are all failing to look at the dates this happened. While we take DNA testing for granted today, it was in it's infancy back then. DNA testing was very expensive and not very widespread. If they felt the evidence was sufficient for a conviction at that time, there would have been no need to push for DNA testing. Now, his defense attorney might have tried to push for it, but that's assuming everything else was circumstantial enough to justify the expense. And it was very expensive back then.

I agree with A that now I wouldn't be comfortable with a death penalty conviction without rock solid evidence, but that conviction was from a different time, in regards to the technology available.

[Esaias]

Why would anyone trust any "DNA test" from a crime lab, when it's been reported that crime labs are rife with corruption and sloppy work?

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Why would anyone trust any "DNA test" from a crime lab, when it's been reported that crime labs are rife with corruption and sloppy work?

I'd rather error on the side of caution. A crime lab investigation at least has a paper trail regarding procedure. Now, if corruption exists in a crime lab, that's a separate issue that must definitely be dealt with.